We can’t leave health care to the market

To the editor:

The April 13 commentary by Donna Dubinsky ("But the insurance market is broken") hit the nail right on the head - except for the fact that health care should never have been trusted to the private insurance market in the first place.

At the beginning, it was so cheap that companies used it as part of benefit packages to lure prospective employees. Some still do, but to a much lesser extent as it becomes criminally more expensive. That's partly because of new and more elaborate treatments and cures, but mostly because insurance companies greedily seeking greater profits can charge higher and higher rates - and they do.

I guess there is nothing wrong with that, as it is the way our system operates.

It proves, however, that something as vital as health care should never be entrusted to a profit-seeking entity because when you treat something as a commodity to be traded on the open market a lot of people who need that commodity are going to be left out.

If that commodity happens to be tiddlywinks nobody is hurt. But health care is a life-or-death matter for a large portion of the population.

DANIEL F. OLIVIER

BULLHEAD CITY, Ariz.

Budget plan

To the editor:

I have a simple response the Republicans can use in reply to Barack Obama's demand for higher taxes on the wealthy.

The Republicans should agree to Mr. Obama's demand with the proviso that the Democrats immediately submit a budget that reflects the added revenues resulting from the higher taxes levied on the rich. I believe the Democrats, headed by Mr. Obama, would come away with egg on their faces as they know the president is grandstanding with this symbolic move, which serves only to separate the classes.

It would also show that the wealthy alone cannot cover the ever-building debt burden being perpetrated on this country by Mr. Obama and his followers.

The Republicans should tell the Democrats to get off their duffs and submit meaningful budgets that truly reduce the deficit and debt.

CLARENCE LANZRATH

LAS VEGAS

No problem

To the editor:

I'd like to challenge Patrick Buchanan's claim that the president "has a big Zimmerman problem" (Thursday commentary).

First, Mr. Buchanan states that Barack"Obama foolishly inserted himself" into the situation. In contrast, I believe President Obama showed his humanity and compassion by empathizing with the grieving family.

I certainly don't see a problem with that.

Second, it's not a "liberal implication" for black kids to walk or drive in fear of racial profiling. It happens every day and everywhere. Now, getting shot while armed with a bag of skittles and an iced tea is a new thing. Didn't we learn anything from the 1999 Amadou Diallo shooting in New York City? Again, nothing to do with Obama.

Third, why would Mr. Zimmerman be the aggressor in any possible confrontation with someone larger? Duh, he had a gun as the ultimate equalizer. President Obama didn't pull that trigger, so where's the problem?

In short, Mr. Zimmerman will never be seen as the "victim" of this tragic case. Justice may be served hot or cold, but Mr. Buchanan assumes that all blacks are savages such as Mr. Zimmerman. You know what happens when you assume.

Mr. Obama has no problem.

Cecil Jones

North Las Vegas